Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Nov 2018 19:31:50 +0000 | From | Will Deacon <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 03/14] arm64: function_graph: Remove use of FTRACE_NOTRACE_DEPTH |
| |
Hi Steve,
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 08:27:11PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@goodmis.org> > > The curr_ret_stack is no longer set to -1 when not tracing a function. It is > now done differently, and the FTRACE_NOTRACE_DEPTH value is no longer used. > Remove the reference to it.
Do you have a pointer to the commit that changed that behaviour? I just want to make sure we're not missing something in our unwind_frame() code.
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > index 4989f7ea1e59..7723dadf25be 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c > @@ -61,9 +61,6 @@ int notrace unwind_frame(struct task_struct *tsk, struct stackframe *frame) > (frame->pc == (unsigned long)return_to_handler)) { > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(frame->graph == -1)) > return -EINVAL;
Hmm, so is this code redundant too ^^ ?
> - if (frame->graph < -1) > - frame->graph += FTRACE_NOTRACE_DEPTH; > -
Do we still need to initialise frame->graph in __save_stack_trace()?
Will
| |